Cargando…
Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclus...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32880752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x |
_version_ | 1783649321441296384 |
---|---|
author | Corrado, Giacomo Ciccarone, Francesca Cosentino, Francesco Legge, Francesco Rosati, Andrea Arcieri, Martina Turco, Luigi Carlo Certelli, Camilla Federico, Alex Vizza, Enrico Fanfani, Francesco Scambia, Giovanni Ferrandina, Gabriella |
author_facet | Corrado, Giacomo Ciccarone, Francesca Cosentino, Francesco Legge, Francesco Rosati, Andrea Arcieri, Martina Turco, Luigi Carlo Certelli, Camilla Federico, Alex Vizza, Enrico Fanfani, Francesco Scambia, Giovanni Ferrandina, Gabriella |
author_sort | Corrado, Giacomo |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclusion criteria were UCS diagnosis confirmed by the definitive histological examination, and stage I or II according to the FIGO staging system. RESULTS: Between August 2000 and March 2019, the data relative to 170 patients bearing UCSs were collected: of these, 95 were defined as early-stage disease (stage I–II) based on the histological report at the primary surgery, and thus were included in this study. Forty-four patients were managed by LPT, and 51 patients were managed by MIS. The operative time was lower in the MIS group versus the LPT group (p value 0.021); the median estimated blood loss was less in the MIS group compared to the median of LPT group (p value < 0.0001). The length of hospital stay days was shorter in the MIS patients (p value < 0.0001). Overall, there were eight (8.4%) post-operative complications; of these, seven were recorded in the LPT group versus one in the MIS group (p value 0.023). There was no difference in the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference of oncologic outcome between the two approaches, in face of a more favourable peri-operative and post-operative profile in the MIS group. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7873090 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78730902021-02-22 Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study Corrado, Giacomo Ciccarone, Francesca Cosentino, Francesco Legge, Francesco Rosati, Andrea Arcieri, Martina Turco, Luigi Carlo Certelli, Camilla Federico, Alex Vizza, Enrico Fanfani, Francesco Scambia, Giovanni Ferrandina, Gabriella J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Original Article – Clinical Oncology OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare surgical and survival outcome in only patients with early-stage UCSs managed by laparotomic surgery (LPT) versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected in four Italian different institutions. Inclusion criteria were UCS diagnosis confirmed by the definitive histological examination, and stage I or II according to the FIGO staging system. RESULTS: Between August 2000 and March 2019, the data relative to 170 patients bearing UCSs were collected: of these, 95 were defined as early-stage disease (stage I–II) based on the histological report at the primary surgery, and thus were included in this study. Forty-four patients were managed by LPT, and 51 patients were managed by MIS. The operative time was lower in the MIS group versus the LPT group (p value 0.021); the median estimated blood loss was less in the MIS group compared to the median of LPT group (p value < 0.0001). The length of hospital stay days was shorter in the MIS patients (p value < 0.0001). Overall, there were eight (8.4%) post-operative complications; of these, seven were recorded in the LPT group versus one in the MIS group (p value 0.023). There was no difference in the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference of oncologic outcome between the two approaches, in face of a more favourable peri-operative and post-operative profile in the MIS group. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-09-03 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7873090/ /pubmed/32880752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article – Clinical Oncology Corrado, Giacomo Ciccarone, Francesca Cosentino, Francesco Legge, Francesco Rosati, Andrea Arcieri, Martina Turco, Luigi Carlo Certelli, Camilla Federico, Alex Vizza, Enrico Fanfani, Francesco Scambia, Giovanni Ferrandina, Gabriella Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title | Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title_full | Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title_fullStr | Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title_full_unstemmed | Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title_short | Role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
title_sort | role of minimally invasive surgery versus open approach in patients with early-stage uterine carcinosarcomas: a retrospective multicentric study |
topic | Original Article – Clinical Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7873090/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32880752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-020-03372-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT corradogiacomo roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT ciccaronefrancesca roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT cosentinofrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT leggefrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT rosatiandrea roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT arcierimartina roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT turcoluigicarlo roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT certellicamilla roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT federicoalex roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT vizzaenrico roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT fanfanifrancesco roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT scambiagiovanni roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy AT ferrandinagabriella roleofminimallyinvasivesurgeryversusopenapproachinpatientswithearlystageuterinecarcinosarcomasaretrospectivemulticentricstudy |